Burlington weekly free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1866-1928, 1887-05-13
THE AMERICAN BOARD.
A New Presentation of an old Question.
[Chrstian Union.1

perfect specimens of what Is commonly de-
is perpetuated by and within itself, by the
choice, at pleasure, of such additional MEM
bers, and such only, as the present members
choose TO add to their own number. No per-
son not thus elected can have any vote in its
councils and acts. 1t allows of no individual
membership, nor any representation from
auxiliary societies, churches, ecclesiastical or
other cooperating bodies, which shall have
any vote in ITS proceedings. 1t stands aloof
from all direct and responsible control Sup
porter5, churches, ecclesiastical bodies, and
auxiliary societies may advise, petition re-
monstrate. and. in the last resort withdraw
support, but this is all. They have no vote
in anything. In whatever pertains to author.
itative direction they are all disfran chised
They have no recognition whatever of their
equal brol hcrhood. Nor have they any pow
err to call the Board or its officers to any re-
sponsible account for the multiplication of
funds already In their hands, or for any NAL
administration whatever. They simply with
mold turther support, and that Is all It is
evident that prerogatives like these ought
neither to be conceded nor exercls ed by any
falltble men -prerogatives never held nor
welded by inspired Apostles themselve
prohibitions of the Great Head of the Church
-prerogatives that are essential rabbinism.
and every way hostile to the spirit and the in
stitutious of a free people.
Let not the conservative reader throw
down his paper at this point with a
Pshaw Let him read this paragraph
again, with care. Let him observe that
1t casts no reflection on either the purity
Of motive or the wisdom of administra-
ton of the members who constitute the
Board; that 1t simply describes the ma
ture of the organization. Let him further
note the fact that this paragraph was not
struck off in the heat of recent controversy.
II is the language of the address of the
Executive Committee of the American
Missionary association, presented to the
second convention for Bible missions,
held in Albany, September and 3, 1916.
For 40 years that paragraph has been be-
fore the churches, and it is still unanswer-
ed except as 40 years of noble and sue
cessful Christian work may be regarded
as an ample answer. That the work of the
Board has been wise. efficient, Christian,
no one who believes in foreign missions
at all will question. Does this constitute
an adequate reply to the keen analysis of
its undemocratlc constitution in the adj
dress of 1916?
change has been introduced into the
policy and the spirit of the administration
rms change has already impaired the
harmony and threatens even the integrity
of the Board it has turned one annual
meeting from great missionary confer
ence into Great Debate" and promises
10 repeat this polemical programme at the
next meeting; 1t has introduced into the
Board theological controversy, which
Is Kept out of every other missionary so.
clety OF the Congregational churches and
mas always heretofore been kept out of
the Board The home secretary, depart
ing from the wise catholicity of his pred
ecessors, has become not only the advo.
cate of a particular theological school, but
has introduced that advocacy into his adj
mlnistration has sent out to the candi-
dates one creed and to the churches an
other, neither of which has before re-
ceived the approval of the Board or its
committee; has addressed inquiries upon
disputed theological points not to be found
paralleied in the correspondence of any
of his predecessors in office; has insisted
on the acceptance of a dogma not con-
tanned in any ecumedical creed of Christ
endom, from the Apostles Creed to the
Creed OF the Evangelical Alliance, nor in
more than half score of creeds of local
Congregational churches and has thus
not only introduced controversy into the
constituency of the Board, but threaten
ed its treasury with serious impairment
of funds, a disaster prevented only by the
earnest and united voices of his theologi-
cal opponents urging those most disatis-
fled wth!these novel methods 10 increase
their contributions and to remember that
the cause of Christ and of human souls
Infinitely transcends all questions of &C.
clesastical method or theological opinion
In short, while the machinery of the
Board remains unchanged, it is no longer
working well it groans and creaks and
complains, the friction is getting worse
rather than better, and ask the American
churches are beginning to themselves, not
only what is the immediate cause of this
disturbance, but whether the ultimate
cause is not to be found in the in the unre-
preventative character of the Board, and
whether some changes in its constitution
and methods are not imperitively called
for.
This is not new question. 1t is simply
new emphasis put by the course of
events on an old question. So long as the
executive officers made the Board repre-
sent the churches, so long the churches
were content, now that the policy of the
Home.Secretary makes it represent frac-
ton of the churches they are beginning to
ask, with considerable seriousness, wheth
er the Board should not be made repre-
sentative, not by the incident of indiyid-
ual management, but by the nature of the
organization. Every other missionary
board in the country is representative; is
there any reason why the American Board
should not be so? Ibis question, asked
so emphatically by the quotation from the
Address of 1916 at the head of this article,
is one to which an increasing number in
the constituency of the Board would like
to see an answer. We should be glad to
receive and publish such an answer Only
let anyone who essays to give it remem-
Der that the question is -
Not: Whether the members of the
American Board and its officers and it's
committeeman are Christian men, unself.
confidence and love of the churches. The
question is not personal;
Nor: Whether during the past three
quarters of century the Board has kept
itself in harmony with the churches, with
out participating in their controversies or
waiting for them to exercise a control over
its administration by the power o. the
purse
NOR; Whether DR.. Alden's theology or
that of Egbelt G. Smyth is more in accor-
dance with the New Testament and the
belief of the churches;
BUT; Whether the churches have any
voices whatever in controlling either the
membership or the methods of the great
missionary organization which depends on
their money for its means and on their
sons and daughters for its missionaries
and, if not, why not ?
We repeat that this question is not a
new one. We have told our readers how
1t was raised forty years ago by men who
believed that the Board was not keeping
pace with the moral sentiment of its CON
Stltuency on the great question of that